Landowners 'deserve compensation over right-to-roam rules'

Thousands of landowners, farmers and businesses should be entitled to
compensation over the Government's right-to-roam plans for the coastline,
according to MPs.

By Paul Eccleston

5:54PM BST 21 Jul 2008

Owners affected by the route of the coastal path around England should be paid if they can prove they will suffer financial loss as a result, says a new report.

This could mean, for example, that a farmer who loses the use of a field due to having to allow the public to pass through it could be given a payout to cover the loss.

Landowners should also have the right to appeal if the route of the coastal path allows walkers on to their land, says the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee (EFRA).

The MPs describe the lack of a formal appeal process in the Draft Marine Bill as a "fundamental weakness" and say it will be impossible to create a continuous path around the coast without causing financial loss to an owner or occupier.

It accepts the case for encouraging greater coastal access but warns safeguards must be written in to the Bill if it is to be seen as sensible and fair.

Related Articles

Plans for a 2,500-mile long coastal pathway which everybody will have the right to walk have been bitterly opposed by landowners, farmers and businesses who have properties bordering the sea.

They claim it will lead to their land being invaded by walkers and will result in a big drop in the value of their land.

Privately-owned beaches, golf courses and farms will be affected although parks and gardens will be exempted from the proposals drawn up by Natural England, which has responsibility for promoting access to the coast and countryside.

The 10 metre-wide 'coastal corridor' will cost an estimated £50m and take 10 years to complete.

The EFRA committee said it was uneasy about so much emphasis on trusting Natural England to get right the siting of the route and said landowners were entitled to more concrete safeguards - including the right to compensation and an independent, third-party appeal process - if there was to be a fair balance between public and private interests.

EFRA said it was not convinced that £5m per year for 10 years would be enough to create access to land all around England and if Natural England got its sums wrong, either the trail would not be completed or other projects would have to be abandoned or delayed.

It called on the Government to clarify responsibility for long?term maintenance before the Marine Bill is introduced.

Committee Chairman Michael Jack said: "The Government must look again at the question of appeals and compensation if this bill is to command widespread landowners' confidence.

"Without these facilities there will be scepticism about the 'leave it all to Natural England' approach currently at the heart of the bill. Long term success of the coastal pathway will not be realised unless the Government also reviews the resources available for the measure, especially when it comes to the question of who will pay for the maintenance of the pathway."